Will Essentials do well?

[pogre]

I sure hope it does well. I especially hope it brings in new players and lapsed players (players not playing a role playing game now). I applaud the effort.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I think just about anything with the name 'Dungeons & Dragons' on the cover will sell 'well' due to the recognition and value of the brand name.

That would be my guess as well.

The better question is if it will sell well enough to meet the expectations of the bean counters.

My best educated guess says "No." As I recall, few supplemental releases stand up to any game's initial release. If they're expecting Core 3 numbers, they're probably going to be disappointed.

OTOH, if they're expecting sales more akin to "DM Only" type supplements, they may just succeed far beyond their expectations.

 

[dm4hire]

As a former 4e supporter I can say that I won't be coming back and quite a few of the people in my area will be in that boat. We gave the system a try and it wasn't to our liking. Many have sold all their books off and while I still have the first two volumes of the core three, as well as setting books for FR and Eberron, I find it very hard to return despite being mildly interested in the Essentials line.

Given what the new line offers I think it’s a little late in my opinion but had it been the initial version of 4e the game might not have lost as many players as it has. Might is the key and it is pure speculation as Markn points out cause we will never know. Will some of those who’ve left return, probably, but the real question isn’t whether Essentials will bring players back as much as will it keep them once they’re back? Sales can’t continue on an even course if you start losing the majority of your market and WotC won’t be able to get away with creating a new edition or product line every two years consistently.

Players remaining, along with the continuation of sales, are what will determine if the Essentials line is a success. I played 4e for over a year before I got tired of it and gave up. I’m a 28 year veteran of the game and outside of a two year lapse have never played anything else as dedicatedly as D&D until now. Pathfinder is my new game of choice, but until I switched that dedication fueled an average monthly expense of $50 on D&D that WotC no longer gets. As Dannyalcatraz points out the Essentials line won’t draw the same figures as a new edition would, but it might spike the market enough to make them happy for now. What WotC needs for it to be a success is for that spike to hang on longer than just during the initial release of the product line. Then and only then will we know if Essentials did well.

 

[S'mon]

I'm interested in picking up the Essentials basic set - at least I was interested 6 months ago. I have to say that recently I've been having such an awesome time GMing 1e/OSRIC online (using City State of the Invincible Overlord), I'm looking at using 1e for my next tabletop campaign and giving 4e a rest. Like 3e above low level, 4e just seems a lot of work and rather slow. Of course this would depend on having players willing to play 1e - the popularity of my online 1e game on Dragonsfoot is not necessarily a reliable guide!

 

[Darrin Drader]

I'm willing to take a look and keep an open mind, but I'm honestly pretty happy with Pathfinder. It would have to be a significant departure to really get me back, and I doubt that's going to happen.

 

[fuzzlewump]

I'm willing to take a look and keep an open mind, but I'm honestly pretty happy with Pathfinder. It would have to be a significant departure to really get me back, and I doubt that's going to happen.

The new rogue and fighter subclasses being based on basic attacks as opposed to lots of encounter powers and dailies seems a good sign for significant change. System fundamentals will stay firmly the same though. I dunno; could be worth a glance even to people who dislike 4e fundamentally, also might be fun to buy the new Red Box for a younger nephew or cousin or whatever to mirror how a lot people on this site were exposed to D&D.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

You stated:

System fundamentals will stay firmly the same though.

and

I dunno; could be worth a glance even to people who dislike 4e fundamentally...

But these 2 statements seem to be at odds with each other: why would people who dislike the fundaments of 4Ed want to try Essentials when those fundaments remain unchanged?

Or do you mean something else?

 

[TheNovaLord]

was quite interested, but it still has lots of 'until next turn' type of stuff so probably still lots fiddly +1s and such to think about

i will give it a good read if someone else buys it and i change my mind

 

[LurkMonkey]

I don't have any real aversion to 4e. I just allocate my scarce resources to the game I am playing. The only reason I didn't switch to 4e at the start was having to obsolesce thousands of dollars in books I had collected for eight years. Pathfinder solved that problem for me.

As a dedicated Pathfinder player, I find myself stretched thin even trying to keep up with their stream of products. In this economy, I just don't have the juice to buy anything I won't be using immediately. Not a slam on 4e, it's a fine system I'm sure, but you have to allocate your resources where you feel they'll do the most good.

I will be following Essentials to see if this gambit pays off for WotC though. It is an interesting market ploy.

 

[DaveMage]

I think just about anything with the name 'Dungeons & Dragons' on the cover will sell 'well' due to the recognition and value of the brand name. The better question is if it will sell well enough to meet the expectations of the bean counters.

This is my view as well.